Cleanup of some oiled Florida beaches may cause more harm

Federal officials are beginning to leave alone some beaches that still have oil in sand below the surface because further cleanup could cause more environmental harm, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said Wednesday.

The explosion and sinking of the Deepwater Horizon oil rig in April led to oil washing ashore on beaches along the western Panhandle in June and July.

Federal officials are gradually ending their cleanup operations at some Panhandle beaches. But they plan to continue monitoring the Panhandle coast and will begin a new shoreline assessment in 2011, said Liz Jones, NOAA's scientific support coordinator.

"To be clear, achieving this stage doesn't mean we are reaching an end point," she said. "It just means that we fully expect, during the coming winter, storms may uncover additional subsurface oil that can be cleaned up as it appears on the shore."


Photos taken June 24-27 in Escambia County, from a University of South Florida research report.

While oil stopped gushing from the well off Louisiana on July 15, scientists say some oil that washed ashore during the summer remains below the sand in Florida beaches along the western Panhandle.

NOAA representatives told reporters they dug more than 2,000 holes in Escambia County looking for oil beneath the surface. Oil has not been found below the surface east of Okaloosa County, a BP contractor said.

The federal agency has developed three categories of beaches -- residential amenity, non-residential and special management -- to determine the extent of the cleanup, said Jacqui Michel, lead NOAA scientist for shoreline cleanup and assessment operations.

At residential amenity beaches such as Pensacola Beach, Fort Walton Beach and Destin, there is an effort to remove all oil on the surface or buried in the sand, Michel said. Recreational state park beaches also fall into that category.

In nonresidential areas that have less public use, such as Eglin and Tyndall Air Force bases, the agency will not be as aggressive, Michel said.

The cleanup guideline, she said, for nonresidential and "special management" beaches is less than 1 percent visible oil and no tar balls or tar patties over certain sizes, she said.

At those nonresidential beaches, minor amounts of oil beneath the surface will not be dug up, Michel said.

The "special management" beaches include national parks and state beach preserves. Park managers are concerned that an aggressive cleanup could affect the animals that live on the beach.

"We are going to be less aggressive in removing the subsurface oil on these beaches because that really does disturb the habitat," Michel said.

A BP contractor said a breakdown of the miles of Florida beaches in each of the three categories was not available.

(Story provided by the Florida Tribune. Story copyrighted by Bruce Ritchie and FloridaEnvironments.com. Do not copy or redistribute without permission, which can be obtained by contacting brucebritchie@gmail.com.)

Florida Cabinet delays Big Cypress land transfer

View Larger Map


The Florida Cabinet on Tuesday delayed action on a proposed transfer of 29,412 acres in Big Cypress National Preserve to the federal government after state Agriculture Commissioner Charles H. Bronson raised concerns about management of the land.

Big Cypress National Preserve is part of the Everglades and covers 729,000 acres in southwest Florida. After Congress established the initial preserve of 540,000 acres in 1974, the state agreed to donate state-owned lands within Big Cypress to the National Park Service. An additional 179,000 acres were added in 1988, including more than 29,000 acres of state land.

But Bronson said the Cabinet should wait until preserve officials complete a management plan for the 179,000 acres, including the state-owned property.

Bronson said he's concerned that the additional property will be designated as a "wilderness." He said that means mechanical equipment would not be allowed, preventing adequate control of wildfires and removal of exotic plant species. That would harm surrounding private land, he said.

"Non-native invasive species are killing our environment," Bronson said. "They are absolutely destroying native species, and those have to be put under control as best as they can before we lose this whole fight."

The state is working closely with the agency and must approve the transfer before an environmental site assessment for the property expires in December, Florida Department of Environmental Protection Secretary Mimi Drew said.

"We are quite anxious," she said. "It is a great environmental project. It is a great project that unites all of the agencies."

Bronson also raised concerns about whether hunting will be allowed within the addition. He said he couldn't vote on the transfer until he has seen a final management plan.

"I think what the commissioner has asked is fairly reasonable," Attorney General Bill McCollum said.

Representatives of The Nature Conservancy and Audubon of Florida urged the Cabinet to take action. The groups also want the state to use $4 million it will receive from the National State Park Service for the Big Cypress property to buy other land through the Florida Forever program.

"The reality is the management plan and conveyance (transfer) are two different issues," said Julie Wraithmell, wildlife policy coordinator for Audubon of Florida.

McCollum made a motion to delay action at least until National Park Service officials can speak to the Cabinet. "I have no problem bringing it back, but there is no assurance you will get my vote," McCollum told Drew.

A spokesman for Big Cypress National Preserve said the agency will allow for the control of exotic species within the proposed addition. He said preserve officials plan to be present at the next Cabinet meeting to address the issues raised.

"When we have the opportunity to address their questions directly, we feel confident their concerns will be alleviated," said Bob DeGross, preserve spokesman.

(Story provided by the Florida Tribune. Story copyrighted by Bruce Ritchie and FloridaEnvironments.com. Do not copy or redistribute without permission, which can be obtained by contacting brucebritchie@gmail.com.)

Florida to appeal ruling overturning 2009 growth law changes

The Attorney General's Office says it will appeal a judge's ruling on a controversial 2009 growth management law that may have created uncertainty and confusion among local governments and developers.

Chief Circuit Judge Charles Francis on Aug. 26 struck down the changes contained in SB 360, which removed a requirement in state law that developers pay for new roads. The bill, which was passed in 2009, also designated eight of the state's largest counties and 411 cities as "dense urban" areas where state oversight of large developments was removed.

The Attorney General's Office filed a notice in Circuit Court on Friday saying that it was appealing to the 1st District Court of Appeal on behalf of Senate President Jeff Atwater and House Speaker Larry Cretul after Francis denied requests for rehearings. A group of cities successfully challenged the law as an "unfunded mandate" prohibited by the state constitution.

SB 360 was one of the most controversial bills in 2009 as it was supported by the Florida Chamber of Commerce and Florida Home Builders Association and faced opposition from environmental groups. Supporters said the bill would encourage urban infill and development while opponents said it would create urban sprawl while removing needed state oversight.

Some cities and counties have successfully adopted new development rules to comply with SB 360 while others were in the process, said Miranda Fitzgerald, an attorney in Orlando with Lowndes, Drosdick, Doster, Kantor & Reed.

The state's decision to appeal stays the implementation of the ruling, the Florida Department of Community Affairs said in a notice posted on its web site Monday. But Fitzgerald said the ruling should cause other cities and counties to wait before moving forward to adopt development rules under SB 360.

"It's confusing and I think everybody's going to be gun-shy," she said. SB 1752 this year protected cities and counties that had received approval of new rules, but Fitzgerald said it's uncertain whether local governments that did not receive approval prior to the Aug. 23 court ruling will be protected.

EDITORS NOTE: An earlier version of this story incorrectly stated that the ruling was being appealed on behalf of Gov. Charlie Crist. Although Crist was a defendant in the lawsuit, the ruling is being appealed only on behalf of Atwater and Cretul.

(Story provided by the Florida Tribune. Story copyrighted by Bruce Ritchie and FloridaEnvironments.com. Do not copy or redistribute without permission, which can be obtained by contacting brucebritchie@gmail.com.)

Florida House Republicans hint at special session on energy rebates

A windmill and billboard promoting solar energy were displayed outside the Capitol earlier this year on Earth Day.

House Republican leaders on Thursday said a special session could be held in November -- possibly during the Legislature's organizational session -- to approve using federal economic stimulus money for state energy rebate programs.

Gov. Charlie Crist got into a flap with House and Senate leaders last week when he said in a letter he was disappointed that the Legislative Budget Commission on Sept. 14 did not authorize spending $51 million in federal stimulus dollars on energy rebates. But Republican legislative leaders said they didn't have legal authority to approve the spending because there were no budget appropriations associated with the rebate programs.

On Thursday, the House Majority Office sent a memo to reporters saying that the Legislature could take up the issue in November or during the 2011 regular session.

Crist had requested $13.9 million for an expired solar rebate program and $17.5 million towards heating and air-conditioning system upgrades as part of a rebate program he announced last month. The solar program, which paid up to $20,000 towards half the cost for solar panels on homes, ended in June with a backlog of at least $50 million after the program ran out of money in June 2009. The state spent $14.4 million federal stimulus dollars in 2009 to pay for rebates.

House Speaker Larry Cretul, R-Ocala, sent Crist a letter saying the governor had announced the $1,500 HVAC program in August knowing that funding had not been approved. He also said the Florida Energy and Climate Commission had been "duping" residents into believing they would receive rebates when money was not available. The governor's office responded that some money was available.

The House Majority Office memo Thursday said Crist had promised money he did not have the legal authority to spend. "This is not an issue of whether or not legislators want to refund Floridians for these rebates that the governor prematurely promised them," the memo said. "The issue is that members of the LBC (Legislative Budget Commission) cannot disregard state law and allow the governor to hand out federal dollars to Floridians in the manner he has requested."

Sterling Ivey, a Crist spokesman, said in response that the governor's office does not believe a special session or full action by the Legislature is needed. The governor's office has said a spending authorization would be legal because the requests are for operating expenses, not a fixed capital expense as the Legislature's Republican leadership claims.

Bruce Kershner, executive director of the Florida Solar Energy Industries Association, said he's concerned that the state may face a deadline for spending the federal stimulus dollars before a special session could be held in November. "We have long advocated that we believe those (solar) rebates should be paid," he said.

Rep. Adam Fetterman, D-Port St. Lucie, sent a letter to Crist and Cretul last Thursday saying that he had received numerous complaints from residents about the solar rebate program and he asked the two leaders to set aside their differences and "do what is right for the people of Florida."

(Story provided by the Florida Tribune. Story copyrighted by Bruce Ritchie and FloridaEnvironments.com. Do not copy or redistribute without permission, which can be obtained by contacting brucebritchie@gmail.com.)

Feds agree to review wood storks' status at request of Florida home-builders

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service says it will review the "endangered" status of wood storks because of a petition filed by the Florida Home Builders Association.

FHBA says the storks' 26-year-old classification is outdated, but an Audubon of Florida representative says the 12-month review raises concerns and that the future of the species should be closely studied.

Wood storks, which have black and white feathers and black scaly skin on their unfeathered heads, can reach a height of nearly four feet tall. They feed on fish in drying wetlands and build their nests in colonies with other wood storks in trees surrounded by water. They use the same colonies for years unless there are disturbances.

The Florida Home Builders Association requested the review in a 2009 petition. FHBA says restrictions on development, permitting and land and water use to protect wood storks are based on the bird's "outdated" classification as endangered since 1984.

Changes in South Florida water flow led to declines in wood stork populations from 15,000 to 20,000 breeding pairs during the 1930s to a low of 4,500 to 5,700 from 1977 to 1980. The birds appear to have adapted to habitat changes in South Florida by expanding their range into Georgia, North Carolina and South Carolina. A recovery plan for the species calls for 6,000 nesting pairs, an objective that was exceeded from 2001 to 2006, the Fish and Wildlife Service said.

Wood storks should be removed from the endangered species list altogether, said Reed Hopper, principal attorney with the Pacific Legal Foundation in Sacramento, Calif., representing the Florida Home Builders Association.

"Until we get universal recognition this species is improved and has improved, we are not going to see any cutbacks in land regulations," Hopper said.

Species should not be listed if they have healthy populations, said Julie Wraithmell, wildlife policy coordinator for Audubon of Florida. But she said the fate of the birds remains uncertain in South Florida, where water problems remain, and in their new range into the Carolinas.

"We are going to have to look closely at the criteria for down-listing," she said. For more information on the review process, click here.

(Story provided by the Florida Tribune. Photo copyrighted by Lou Kellenberger. Story copyrighted by Bruce Ritchie and FloridaEnvironments.com. Do not copy or redistribute without permission, which can be obtained by contacting brucebritchie@gmail.com.)

Backlash brewing against Florida septic tanks requirement

A proposed state septic tank rule and the legislation that sparked the rule are becoming the focus of anti-government critics.

SB 550 during the legislative session requires septic tank owners statewide to receive an inspection at least once every five years. A Florida Department of Health advisory board is reviewing a draft rule on Thursday and DOH has scheduled a series of workshops in October.

The bill was promoted as a measure to protect Florida's springs, which have become choked with weeds and algae as nitrogen in groundwater from a variety of sources has increased. DOH and the septic tank industry say septic tanks should be inspected and pumped out every three to five years to keep them functioning properly. Florida has 2.6 million septic tanks, according to a DOH study completed May 1.

But SB 550 is facing a backlash from critics in the Legislature and some rural counties. Rep. Marti Coley, R-Marianna, and Sen. Evelyn Lynn, R-Ormond Beach say they will introduce bills in the next legislative session to repeal the measure.

"I just simply think that to mandate every five years for every homeowner with a septic tank to have it inspected is unnecessary and big government," Coley said. She introduced a bill to repeal the mandate during the July special session on oil drilling but the Legislature adjourned without voting on any legislation.

The septic tank inspections by private contractors could cost $100 to $300, according to the Department of Health. Septic tank owners could spend roughly $200 to get the tank pumped out at that time. The rules take effect Jan. 1 with the inspection requirement being phased in over five years.

The Jackson County Commission on July 26 wrote to Gov. Charlie Crist saying that the county wants the law repealed or that the DOH rules be "written in such a way that they will be the least burdensome to the citizens of rural Florida."

The Santa Rosa County Commission on Monday heard complaints from residents about the state requirement. Pace resident Sharon Glass, a local tea party organizer, said she is willing to rent a bus to take residents to Tallahassee to protest, according to the Pensacola News Journal.

The Department of Health is working with its advisory board and contractors to make sure inspection is provided at the lowest cost possible, said Gerald Briggs, the department's bureau chief for onsite sewage programs.

"We are very concerned this will cost property owners and we are making sure the cost is as low as we can make," Briggs said.

The inspection requirement will help the state identify septic tanks that are in violation of regulations and are polluting groundwater, said Sam Averett, president of Averett Septic Tank in Lakeland. He said some homes may require new drain fields installed on mounds of soil at a cost $5,000 to $6,000.

"Every system needs to be maintained," Averett said. "You are affecting some water body somewhere -- everywhere in the state...If the homeowners were maintaining their systems to begin with this would not be an issue -- but they are not."

(Story provided by the Florida Tribune. Story copyrighted by Bruce Ritchie and FloridaEnvironments.com. Do not copy or redistribute without permission, which can be obtained by contacting brucebritchie@gmail.com.)

Crist fills two Florida Public Service Commission seats to be vacated by ouster

Gov. Charlie Crist again passed over a state senator and a former Florida Public Service executive director and instead named Eduardo Balbis and Julie I. Brown to the Public Service Commission on Tuesday.

Balbis, 38, is an assistant city attorney in West Palm Beach, and Brown, 35, is associate legal counsel for the First American Corp. They will replace Commission Chairman Nancy Argenziano and Commissioner Nathan A. Skop when their terms expire in January.

Argenziano and Skop were effectively ousted in June when the PSC Nominating Council chose not to include them among the 18 candidates that were being interviewed for their seats. Argenziano and Skop blamed the influence of utilities over the Legislature but Sen. Mike Bennett, R-Bradenton and chairman of the PSC Nominating Council, said there was a desire to "clean house" because of infighting among PSC members.

In choosing Balbis and Brown, Crist passed over Sen. Lee Constantine, R-Altamonte Springs and former PSC Executive Director Mary Bane. Both names were offered by the council to Crist for the Klement and Stevens seats that the governor filled in July with Art Graham and Rep. Ron Brisé.

Crist said in a statement that Balbis' duties overseeing municipalities and public works in West Palm Beach for the past three years "have already given him the opportunity to demonstrate his commitment to protecting consumers.”

And the governor said Brown had shown that she understands the "fairness and judgement" that must be exercised by PSC members.

“Her past experience ensuring real estate agreements comply with all regulations, as well as reviewing proposed changes to historic properties as a member of a zoning board, have provided her valuable insight into the needs of Florida consumers,” he said.

The next governor could replace the four appointees before they are confirmed by the Senate as Crist did when he took office in 2007. Or they could face the same tough Senate fight that led to Klement and Stevens being ousted.

Bennett said Tuesday he doesn't think that will happen or that the Crist appointees will face any confirmation difficulties.

"I have to tell you the list of people we interviewed this time, practically the entire slate, was probably the best qualified slate of people I have ever seen for the PSC," Bennett said. "There were some tough choices, very tough choices."